Ted Hardie wrote:
...
Perhaps it is just me; this is not stuff I am following in any depth.
But the
impression I'm getting from following the thread is that there is some
disagreement about how to structure the work to make sure it really
does reduce pain, rather than just shift it around.
It is not just you. The basic tenant here is a hand-wave that some magic set
of engineering choices will resolve a collection of policy conflicts.
Fortunately there is enough sanity to recognize that we don't even have a
consistent view of the problem space, so the intent as I understand it is to
document what we know. That step is not going to either reduce pain or move
it, but the follow-on will result in moving it because the network admin's
perspective of what is 'right' is in direct conflict with the perspective of
the sys admin, and neither of them care about the end user trying to get
something done. Resolving this requires a real signaling and negotiation
infrastructure, and the IETF has refused to replace RSVP as an endpoint
signaling path, so the entire effort can only lead to shifting the pain.
Tony
_______________________________________________
Ietf mailing list
Ietf(_at_)ietf(_dot_)org
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ietf